[OE-core] [PATCH 2/3] archiver.bbclass: archive sources, patches, logs to tarball
Mark Hatle
mark.hatle at windriver.com
Mon Mar 12 18:54:58 UTC 2012
Apologies for the very late review... see comments below. All in all it looks
good. But I have not applied it and tried it yet.
On 3/3/12 4:54 AM, Xiaofeng Yan wrote:
> From: Xiaofeng Yan<xiaofeng.yan at windriver.com>
>
> Support the following functions in this bbclass:
>
> 1 Archive sources in ${S} in the different stage to tarball (do_unpack,do_patch,do_configure).
> 2 Archive patches including series to tarball
> 3 Archive logs including scripts (.bb and .inc files) to tarball
> 4 dump environment resources which show all variable and functions to be
> used to xxx.showdata.dump when running a task
> 5 dump all content in 's' including patches to file xxx.diff.gz
>
> All of tarballs will be deployed to ${DEPLOY_DIR}/sources/
>
> [#YOCTO 1977]
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiaofeng Yan<xiaofeng.yan at windriver.com>
> ---
> meta/classes/archiver.bbclass | 393 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 393 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 meta/classes/archiver.bbclass
>
...
> +def verify_var(d):
> + '''check the type for archiving package('tar' or 'srpm')'''
> + try:
> + if d.getVar('SOURCE_ARCHIVE_PACKAGE_TYPE', True).upper() not in d.getVar('ARCHIVE_TYPE', True).split():
> + raise AttributeError
> + except AttributeError:
> + bb.fatal("\"SOURCE_ARCHIVE_PACKAGE_TYPE\" is \'tar\' or \'srpm\', no other types")
Error message should be something like:
bb.fatal("\"SOURCE_ARCHIVE_PACKAGE_TYPE\" should be \'tar\' or '\srpm\'")
...
> +def archive_sources_patches(d,middle_name):
> + '''archive sources and patches to tarball. middle_name will append strings ${middle_name} to ${PR} as middle name. for example, zlib-1.4.6-prepatch(middle_name).tar.gz '''
> + verify_var(d)
> + if not_tarball(d):
> + return
> +
> + source_tar_name = archive_sources(d,middle_name)
> + if middle_name == "prepatch":
> + if d.getVar('PATCHES_ARCHIVE_WITH_SERIES',True).upper() == 'TRUE':
> + patch_tar_name = select_archive_patches(d,"all")
> + elif d.getVar('PATCHES_ARCHIVE_WITH_SERIES',True).upper() == 'FALSE':
> + patch_tar_name = select_archive_patches(d,"applying")
> + else:
> + bb.fatal("Please define 'PATCHES_ARCHIVE_WITH_SERIES' is strings 'True' or 'False' ")
Instead of an explicit TRUE/FALSE setting, does it make sense for one to be the
default? I'd suspect in this case "True" is the better default, but I'm not
completely sure.
> + else:
> + patch_tar_name = ''
> +
> + if d.getVar('SOURCE_ARCHIVE_PACKAGE_TYPE', True).upper() not in 'SRPM':
> + move_tarball_deploy(d,[source_tar_name,patch_tar_name])
> +
> +def archive_sources_patches_logs_copyleft(d,middle_name):
> + '''archive source, patches and logs according to the variable "COPYLEFT_COMPLIANCE", If this variable is 'True', then archive the packages for copy-left, or else archive all packages'''
> + verify_var(d)
> + if not_tarball(d):
> + return
> + copyleft_compliance = d.getVar('COPYLEFT_COMPLIANCE', True)
> + if copyleft_compliance is None:
> + archive_sources_patches(d,middle_name)
> + elif copyleft_compliance.upper() == 'TRUE' and archive_copyleft(d):
> + archive_sources_patches(d,middle_name)
I'm not sure I understand what is happening in this patch. The way I read it:
If COPYLEFT_COMPLIANCE is -not- set, then we archive.. otherwise if it is set
(true), and the copyleft item was inherited we also archive?
But I'm not sure I understand why this set of checks.
...
> +def dumpdata(d):
> + '''dump environment to "${P}-${PR}.showdata.dump" including all kinds of varibale and functions when running a task'''
Simple typo above, should be "variable".
...
> +# This functions prepare for archiving "linux-yocto" because this package create directory 's' before do_patch instead of after do_unpack.
> +# This is special control for archiving linux-yocto only.
> +python do_archive_linux_yocto(){
> + s = d.getVar('S', True)
> + if 'linux-yocto' in s:
> + source_tar_name = archive_sources(d,'')
> + if d.getVar('SOURCE_ARCHIVE_PACKAGE_TYPE', True).upper() not in 'SRPM':
> + move_tarball_deploy(d,[source_tar_name,''])
> +}
Is there something we can change in linux-yocto to make the standard methods
work? I'm hesitant to put special logic in the archiver class for a single
package. (Note, I'm more likely to think it's reasonable for the kernel's
package then a random userspace package!)
> +do_kernel_checkout[postfuncs] += "do_archive_linux_yocto "
> +
Is the real issue that we want to run something just before do_patch, but we
also want to let any arbitrary tasks between do_unpack and do_patch to run
first? Is there an alternative way to state this? [or at least detect a
situation where we haven't waited?]
> +# remove tarball for sources, patches and logs after creating srpm.
> +python do_remove_tarball(){
> + if d.getVar('SOURCE_ARCHIVE_PACKAGE_TYPE', True).upper() == 'SRPM':
> + work_dir = d.getVar('WORKDIR', True)
> + os.chdir(work_dir)
> + for file in os.listdir(os.getcwd()):
> + if '.tar.gz' in file:
> + os.remove(file)
> +}
> +do_remove_taball[deptask] = "do_archive_scripts_logs"
> +do_package_write_rpm[postfuncs] += "do_remove_tarball "
Finally do we really need to remove the tarball? It can likely just stay
around, when the user wipes out/cleans the WORKDIR it will go away on it's own?
--Mark
More information about the Openembedded-core
mailing list